Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Travric, you still didn't explain to me what would be a purpose for Putin "to destabilize Baltics?"
Crimea had military base hosting Russian fleet for centuries - that's given; East Ukraine is tied to Russia by economy plus language & cultural ties; what's in the Baltics?
Again, may be I am missing something, so please make your case.
I think putin wants the old Imeprial / Soviet empires restored to their former glory as much as possible. One possible benefit of bringing the Baltics back as quasi independent satellite states is that relative to Russia, they have advanced economies and thus their contributions to a new empire would be more than their relative sizes.
There are also alot of ethnic Russians living there. In contrast to east Ukraine, where the Russification was gradual and at least somewhat natural, after WWII the Soviets had a systematic program to settle Russians in the Baltics that led to Russians out numbering Estonians in Estonia in only two generations.
I think putin wants the old Imeprial / Soviet empires restored to their former glory as much as possible. One possible benefit of bringing the Baltics back as quasi independent satellite states is that relative to Russia, they have advanced economies and thus their contributions to a new empire would be more than their relative sizes.
There are also alot of ethnic Russians living there. In contrast to east Ukraine, where the Russification was gradual and at least somewhat natural, after WWII the Soviets had a systematic program to settle Russians in the Baltics that led to Russians out numbering Estonians in Estonia in only two generations.
OK..kkk.
Let's look into what's a fact here and what's fiction.
So when it comes to Estonia - indeed the Soviet policies contributed to increase of non-Estonian population there
"Between 1945 and 1989, the share of ethnic Estonians in the population resident within the currently defined boundaries of Estonia dropped to 61%, caused primarily by the Soviet programme promoting mass immigration of urban industrial workers from Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus, as well as by wartime emigration and Joseph Stalin's mass deportations and executions.[citation needed] By 1989, minorities constituted more than one-third of the population, as the number of non-Estonians had grown almost fivefold," Estonia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
and as we can see on the graphic of English Wikipedia, overall population of Estonia was steadily on the rise in the seventies, ( as elsewhere in the Soviet Union) with visible drop in the nineties, ( as elsewhere in the country) after the fall of the Soviet Union. What English Wiki doesn't mention however, is that from 1992 to 2012 ( i.e. the post-Soviet period) Estonia, in spite of the increase of its own ethnic population from 61% to 69% became actually less populated, because of the mass migration and negative growth of birth rates ( common trait of all Europe I suppose?)
However even back in Soviet times Russians in Estonia were concentrated only in few spots, and Narva would be one of them. Historically strategic location I would think, where the increase of Russian population would be encouraged by Soviet government for obvious reasons, plus I would think the areas where production of heavy machinery\technology was established - that's where Russians would have been resettled first of all, and in this terms I'd think first of all Tallinn. As for the rest of the country - you wouldn't find too many Russians there; Russian language was resisted ( and not spoken) in many areas of Estonia at all on general population level, so even back in Soviet times you'd know that you were in a different "country," even though it was nominally a "republic" in the same country.
Same picture was in Lithuania; the only Baltic country that VISIBLY lost its population was Latvia.
But Latvians, being one of the poorest areas of Russian Empire, took active participation in Bolshevik revolution, and probably were purged the heaviest out of all three ( at least this was a thought expressed by Solzhenitsyn in his Archipelago.)
Whatever their situation was, all three of them WERE NOT "independent satellite states" back in Soviet times; they were PART of the Soviet Union, being FORCEFULLY ( I am sure) included in it, as the spoils of war.
Once they were allowed to go their own separate way ( after all the maps of the world are redesigned once in a while, after so much time passes after the wars,) I don't see any realistic possibility of turning one into a "satellite" ( i.e. an ally of some kind) serving interests of another state with which it doesn't have any particularly friendly relations. And using Russian population for this purpose? Keeping in mind it's too miniscule, and concentrated only in certain ( mostly close to border) areas? Unrealistic, if you ask me.
I think putin wants the old Imeprial / Soviet empires restored to their former glory as much as possible. One possible benefit of bringing the Baltics back as quasi independent satellite states is that relative to Russia, they have advanced economies and thus their contributions to a new empire would be more than their relative sizes.
There are also alot of ethnic Russians living there. In contrast to east Ukraine, where the Russification was gradual and at least somewhat natural, after WWII the Soviets had a systematic program to settle Russians in the Baltics that led to Russians out numbering Estonians in Estonia in only two generations.
Sorry - what advanced economies ? They have very little, economically speaking. Even compared to Russia. They are puny nations with no special industries to speak of.
They were always just a buffer between Russia and Sweden / Germany. And if he wants them as a buffer, that makes at least some sense.
However, now that they are members of the EU, it's hard to see Putin willing to start a war there like he did in Ukraine.
I get the impression that most people in the Donbas have historically considered themselves Russian rather than Ukrainian. And the sense of "Russianness" fades as you move west.
I think putin wants the old Imeprial / Soviet empires restored to their former glory as much as possible. One possible benefit of bringing the Baltics back as quasi independent satellite states is that relative to Russia, they have advanced economies and thus their contributions to a new empire would be more than their relative sizes.
Actually, Putin has limited his annexations - formal or effective - to places where the people actually want (or, at the time, wanted) to be under the control of Moscow. This was true in South Ossetia/Abkhazia, Crimea, eastern Ukraine. And it makes sense. Controlling people who do not want to be controlled is problematic.
However, the situation in the Baltics is not analogous. For one, there is little separatist sentiment. While they don't always like what is going on in Vilnius, Riga and Tallinn, they seem to be very clear on the point that they want greater freedom as nationals of those states, not that they want to be Russian nationals.
Further, even if NATO didn't defend the Baltics - and it would - capital would flee and the local economies would be in utter tatters. The annexation wouldn't pay for the cost of the conquest. And that's even before calculating the cost of the new sanctions that would be slapped on Russia and its further diplomatic isolation. But it's an academic point. Putin, for his myriad faults, appears to know which lines can be crossed. There's nothing in it for Russia were they to seize the Baltics. As such, it won't happen.
Re: ' Putin, for his myriad faults, appears to know which lines can be crossed. There's nothing in it for Russia were they to seize the Baltics. As such, it won't happen'
You know I believe you are misjudging the old boy. From the looks of it Putin would love nothing better than to destroy Ukraine as a nation. It is too dangerous a country for him to have alongside him. He is afraid the country will catch the 'Ukrainian cold' namely the shift to the West and Europe. Frankly, a horror. As practically nothing has moved as war continues and with no end in sight we can see the aggressive Russian policies to its neighbor. Putin would love to see the continuing enfeeblement of a country struggling for territorial integrity
as well as seeing her exhausted in trying to get industries to develop.
And the Baltics? If the past is any indication the area is always potential chum for the bear. Their territory is always a potential invasion site. Georgia, Ukraine and the Crimea helped the Baltics to see that and put them on alert. At this point there's plenty of spying and flying over borders and such to keep everyone occupied for the foreseeable future. And on another point Russia indeed has been doing a lot of traveling and sightseeing and stopping off in different countries in these past few years. It seems they love to 'get out' and spread their wings at the expense of their hosts.
The thread titled "The Future of Ukraine" in the Europe forum is so long and meandering that I would like to start a new thread discussing Ukraine's past.
Was there ever a united, independent Ukraine before the collapse of the Soviet Union?
CD's Russian nazi regulars just cannot have enough of Ukraine, the same people, the same bs, year after year, the Kremlin Fuhrer gave them hope for the final solution of Ukrainian question and restoration of the lame Empire.
Ukrainian ethnicity preserved the sense of common identity despite being split for hundreds of years between different hostile entities obsessed about wiping Ukrainian identity out. Different incarnations of Muscovite state (Muscovy, Russian Empire, USSR, RF) were/are the most obsessive assimilators costing Ukrainians uncountable millions of the lost lives, exterminated and assimilated into Russian collective. Russia stunted the development of a unified Ukrainian nation, the damage is extensive, perhaps irrepearable in some areas, however recent Russian hybrid blitzkrieg suggests that Muscovites are afraid of Ukraine entering a new chapter of independent (of Moscow) development.
What is the point of your backhanded question? You know very well that more or less united, independent Ukrainian proto state ended after treacherous Muscovites struck separate Andrusovo peace with Poland in 1667 that divided Ukrainian lands without knowledge of Ukrainian allies of the Muscovites.
I get the impression that most people in the Donbas have historically considered themselves Russian rather than Ukrainian. And the sense of "Russianness" fades as you move west.
And you get your impressions from Russia Today or newspaper Zavtra? A large chunk of Ukraine is Russified, but Donbass and Crimea were not just Russified they were/are toxic aggressive brew that dissolved, not just Ukrainian etc. languages, identities itself, many people gave up on their roots for safety and sanity sake, their children were absorbed by the toxic Russian culture based environment.
In the case of Donbass, a dumping ground for de-nationalized criminals throughout Soviet years, the regional culture is a weird mix of criminal code of ethics, modified Russian nazism, with emphasis on the linguistic and cultural nazism, and local identity created and carefully tended by the regional semi-criminal elites especially in the past 30 years. Ukrainian identity had no immunity to that, or Polish identity, or any other idenity thrown in that brew, but especially Ukrainian identity. Original Ukrainian population of Donbass was decimated by Stalin' famine of 1930s. After WW2 hundreds of thousands of Ukranian peasants were drafted to restore Donbass industries, Russian ethnicity was never arithmetic majority there. Obviously, Donbass criminal bosses did not tend Donbass identity to hand over to Kremlin dwarf and his imperial delusions, but criminal ethics values hierarchy and strong gangsta boss at the top. The 2013-2014 events discredeted Donbass elites in the local eyes (too soft and cowardly, a big NoNo in the criminal ethics book). Local elites attempting to use Donbass identity one more time to get more feudal rights for themselves backfired, Russian Fuhrer saw no need for that old circuis, and took over the controls.
Funny thing, Crimean Russian nazis never really tried to hide their hatred for Ukraine and everything Ukrainian, an old fashioned nazism. Yet when Yanukovich was in power they disliked Donbass people too and never viewed them as equals because of their thuggish, "uncultured", lumpen ways, slang and accent loaded Russian, and non existent allegiance to the Imperial cause. A miracle has happened since then. Kremlin' strongman united Russian cultured folks deutsch of Ukraine in the holy hybrid war to expand Reich.
What is the point of your backhanded question? You know very well that more or less united, independent Ukrainian proto state ended after treacherous Muscovites struck separate Andrusovo peace with Poland in 1667 that divided Ukrainian lands without knowledge of Ukrainian allies of the Muscovites.
No sense in getting angry. I'm not trying to start a flame war. I am interested in history.
I didn't "know" anything about the end of a "Ukrainian proto state" at a certain date.
Andrusovo, Treaty of. A peace treaty between Poland and Muscovy, signed 13 January 1667 in the village of Andrusovo near Smolensk, Muscovy, that remained in effect for thirteen and one-half years. It terminated the war that began in 1654. According to this treaty, Left-Bank Ukraine remained under Muscovite rule, while Right-Bank Ukraine was transferred to Poland. Kyiv was to remain in Russian hands for two years, but the Russians kept it permanently. The Zaporozhian Sich came under the joint protection of Muscovy and Poland. This was the first partition of Ukraine, and it was confirmed by the so-called Eternal Peace of 1686. The events leading to the Treaty of Andrusovo are analyzed in C. B. O'Brien's Muscovy and the Ukraine from the Pereiaslav Agreement to the Truce of Andrusovo, 1654-1667 (Berkeley 1963).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
